Well if people love to group, they will group.  If people love to solo, they will only play, if they can solo.

---

Originally posted by Torchwood

Well if people love to group, they will group.  If people love to solo, they will only play, if they can solo.

---

That's why it is important for both playstyles to have a place in an MMORPG. Far as I can see that will be the case in this game.

Originally posted by oddjobs74

Originally posted by Hagonbok

Originally posted by oddjobs74

I am not a Player Crew person, as I don't really see how it could work. (full time anyhow) Looking past surface value of what the premise of the game is, I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that this is a single player game. This is in evidence by the misspelling of the title of their own game. Sadly, this is becoming a more common mistake these days.

It's also a coincidence that games with misspelled titles are proving to be massive single player games.

What misspelling is that?

 

The propper spelling for the game being produced is WoW Trek Online. This is a common occurence these days.  I first noticed after playing Mythic's latest release, that the title on the box, websites and on the disk was misspelled. The propper spelling is WoWhammer.

Also on the horizon is WoW Wars: The Old Republic,(printed as Star Wars: TOR)  and WoWGate Evolution. (prinyed as JumpGate Evolution)

hehe, funny because it is true. :)

Originally posted by Krasny

From what I have read STO is going to be a massive single player game.

 

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of playing a game online?

All mmos are essentially single player games with co-op mode built in.......so who cares? Here comes another one with a different slant on the same theme (shrug)

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by oddjobs74

Originally posted by Hagonbok

Originally posted by oddjobs74

I am not a Player Crew person, as I don't really see how it could work. (full time anyhow) Looking past surface value of what the premise of the game is, I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that this is a single player game. This is in evidence by the misspelling of the title of their own game. Sadly, this is becoming a more common mistake these days.

It's also a coincidence that games with misspelled titles are proving to be massive single player games.

What misspelling is that?

 

The propper spelling for the game being produced is WoW Trek Online. This is a common occurence these days.  I first noticed after playing Mythic's latest release, that the title on the box, websites and on the disk was misspelled. The propper spelling is WoWhammer.

Also on the horizon is WoW Wars: The Old Republic,(printed as Star Wars: TOR)  and WoWGate Evolution. (prinyed as JumpGate Evolution)

hehe, funny because it is true. :)

Well really not true since the game bares no resemblance to WoW at all in it's philosophy of design.

Maybe you better stick to trolling the WAR, Darkfall, and AoC forums mate. You're out of your league here I think.

Yes the trolls abound and set their sites on any upcoming game they  fear may have a chance at success. The thing that amuses me is the fact that most of the ones crying Wowhammer, and Wowtrek are the WOW fanboys hoping to make sure their beloved grindfest remains at the top of the mmo heap while none of them no shit about what STO or SWTOR will be like.

Originally posted by Krasny

From what I have read STO is going to be a massive single player game.

 

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of playing a game online?

Ok for your first statement I would have to say that you must not have read all the articles on this game because a single player game you imply it is impossible to play with other online players which just isn't the case.All the standard mmo features exist in this game or so I've read.

Now for your second statement that would obviously depend on what your own purpose was for playing a game online.I myself would have absolutely no problem playing a game online that offered the size of mmos yet none of the features of online co-op/pvp play.There are various reasons to play a game online and this game as most others released seems to be doing it's part to reach them all.

Originally posted by dhayes68

Originally posted by oddjobs74

I am not a Player Crew person, as I don't really see how it could work. (full time anyhow) Looking past surface value of what the premise of the game is, I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that this is a single player game. This is in evidence by the misspelling of the title of their own game. Sadly, this is becoming a more common mistake these days.

It's also a coincidence that games with misspelled titles are proving to be massive single player games.

 

Easy. Ships above a certain class size require x number of players to pilot. Posittions can be filled either by npc's or other players. Skill of the npc's determined by level/skill of the captain. Stations crewed by players receive a small bonus to whatever it is they do.

The upshot would be that you can captain small craft on your own or captain larger ships with either npc's or a player crew.   That would be (imo) a dynamic of an MMO that caters to lots of different kinds of players. The fact they could have gone this or some other route and chose not to is why people say its a single player game with multiplayer rather than an MMO.

 

I love the idea you have in there and it's my sentiment exactly companies should have the vision and foresight to try and make things that will appease all players and the truth is if they forced the game into a box and made everyone have to play a "station" you are basically going to be spending all of your time playing some type of foolish mini game and lets be honest who on this sight has ever praised a game for it's hundrerds of (forced) mini games?
 

Now obviously if you are thinking outside the box and truly intend to make a product to wow the masses then you would infact offer this option and create the mini games necessary for the players to do this.

But what we are saying essentially now is that it is peoples assertion that because the product does not fit the mold that they seek it is not an mmo?

This assertion is akin to stripping a good 90 percent of the mmos out of the title of mmo Star Trek Online offers the exact same online components as Coh/V,SWG,LOTRO,AOC,WOW,DF,EQ1,EQ2 and I could obviously go on further but my point is these titles are not mmos either then there to my knowledge has never been a game made that you were forced to group or unable to play which is what trolling about a games status indicates.

People think that because it may not suit them that they need to jump on a bandwagon but I think what you presented made much more sense a great idea to allow for the maximum amount of enjoyment when we game.

Originally posted by dhayes68

Originally posted by randomt

I suppose that means EvE is also a mmospg? heh

 

The difference is the lore in EvE supports single player ships. Group the ships together and you're in MMO land. The lore of Star Trek, generally speaking does not support single player ships.  Its counter to what the Star Trek experience is for a lot of people. 

I've stated in posts past that I was never a huge fan of the star trek shows not as much as the films and the novels which more often dealt with the federation as a whole and less with the actions of one captain and his crew and there largely mundane tasks.Having said that I am still for having a way for all the mini gamers out there to have there little mini games because I just don't believe in alienating but it still takes me back to the point that I simply don't see how people think they are going to play a game log in as Scotty only to find the captain is on vacation what then?

Originally posted by miagisan

Originally posted by oddjobs74

I am not a Player Crew person, as I don't really see how it could work. (full time anyhow) 

 worked just fine in swg when you needed 2-8 people for the bigger ships

Problem is it doesn't work just fine in SWG now (getting gunners together for a POB/Gunship is always a problem for the larger Pvp events) nor is it the same situation since I can easily see the following happening in STO:

Stardate. 15234

Why yes planet X, we'd love to come save you from the mind eating killer taco's, but our engineer had to take his dog out for a walk and you'll need have to wait.....oh hang on engineer's back, helm, helm? 'AFK BRB spamwich break'.  Ahhhh planet X I think you're on your own.

Putting in the ability to replace NPC's with players to get a skills plus would be great, but to require X numbers of players to make the ship go & fight wouldn't be.  If you can get a group/guild/whatnot together on the same ship great.  If not you should still be able to play.

Originally posted by Nebless

Originally posted by miagisan

Originally posted by oddjobs74

I am not a Player Crew person, as I don't really see how it could work. (full time anyhow) 

 worked just fine in swg when you needed 2-8 people for the bigger ships

 

Problem is it doesn't work just fine in SWG now (getting gunners together for a POB/Gunship is always a problem for the larger Pvp events) nor is it the same situation since I can easily see the following happening in STO:

Stardate. 15234

Why yes planet X, we'd love to come save you from the mind eating killer taco's, but our engineer had to take his dog out for a walk and you'll need have to wait.....oh hang on engineer's back, helm, helm? 'AFK BRB spamwich break'.  Ahhhh planet X I think you're on your own.

Putting in the ability to replace NPC's with players to get a skills plus would be great, but to require X numbers of players to make the ship go & fight wouldn't be.  If you can get a group/guild/whatnot together on the same ship great.  If not you should still be able to play.

That's why I think my idea of the dreadnaught ships being multiplayer crewed only would work. They would be the top of the line ships, so naturally more people would have to be involved. Those that don't like grouping could fly all ships by themselves with the exception of the Sovereign or Neg-var.
 

Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by Nebless

Originally posted by miagisan

Originally posted by oddjobs74

I am not a Player Crew person, as I don't really see how it could work. (full time anyhow) 

 worked just fine in swg when you needed 2-8 people for the bigger ships

 

Problem is it doesn't work just fine in SWG now (getting gunners together for a POB/Gunship is always a problem for the larger Pvp events) nor is it the same situation since I can easily see the following happening in STO:

Stardate. 15234

Why yes planet X, we'd love to come save you from the mind eating killer taco's, but our engineer had to take his dog out for a walk and you'll need have to wait.....oh hang on engineer's back, helm, helm? 'AFK BRB spamwich break'.  Ahhhh planet X I think you're on your own.

Putting in the ability to replace NPC's with players to get a skills plus would be great, but to require X numbers of players to make the ship go & fight wouldn't be.  If you can get a group/guild/whatnot together on the same ship great.  If not you should still be able to play.

That's why I think my idea of the dreadnaught ships being multiplayer crewed only would work. They would be the top of the line ships, so naturally more people would have to be involved. Those that don't like grouping could fly all ships by themselves with the exception of the Sovereign or Neg-var.
 

I know we disagree on the multi-player ship crew/interiors thing.....and it's somewhat of an academic discussion at this point because they are clearly not making the type of game that I would be interested in playing.... However playing devils advocate here.... If they had the mechanics in place to support multi-player crews, why would you artificialy limit it only to Dreadnaughts?

What would be the problem of giving people the OPTION of flying smaller ships with Multi-Player crews, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED?

If the mechanics were in place to support multi-player crews on Dreadnaughts, obviously those exact same mechanics could be implimented on any other ship (other then single-seat fighters). So players that wanted to fly ship X in single-player mode could..... players that wanted to fly ship X in multi-player mode could..... both play styles could be accomodated. Why would that be a problem for you?

Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by Nebless

Originally posted by miagisan

Originally posted by oddjobs74

I am not a Player Crew person, as I don't really see how it could work. (full time anyhow) 

 worked just fine in swg when you needed 2-8 people for the bigger ships

 

Problem is it doesn't work just fine in SWG now (getting gunners together for a POB/Gunship is always a problem for the larger Pvp events) nor is it the same situation since I can easily see the following happening in STO:

Stardate. 15234

Why yes planet X, we'd love to come save you from the mind eating killer taco's, but our engineer had to take his dog out for a walk and you'll need have to wait.....oh hang on engineer's back, helm, helm? 'AFK BRB spamwich break'.  Ahhhh planet X I think you're on your own.

Putting in the ability to replace NPC's with players to get a skills plus would be great, but to require X numbers of players to make the ship go & fight wouldn't be.  If you can get a group/guild/whatnot together on the same ship great.  If not you should still be able to play.

That's why I think my idea of the dreadnaught ships being multiplayer crewed only would work. They would be the top of the line ships, so naturally more people would have to be involved. Those that don't like grouping could fly all ships by themselves with the exception of the Sovereign or Neg-var.
 

 

I know we disagree on the multi-player ship crew/interiors thing.....and it's somewhat of an academic discussion at this point because they are clearly not making the type of game that I would be interested in playing.... However playing devils advocate here.... If they had the mechanics in place to support multi-player crews, why would you artificialy limit it only to Dreadnaughts?

What would be the problem of giving people the OPTION of flying smaller ships with Multi-Player crews, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED?

If the mechanics were in place to support multi-player crews on Dreadnaughts, obviously those exact same mechanics could be implimented on any other ship (other then single-seat fighters). So players that wanted to fly ship X in single-player mode could..... players that wanted to fly ship X in multi-player mode could..... both play styles could be accomodated. Why would that be a problem for you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It never has been a problem with me.If they were to put what you say in, great. The more options the better. I don't make the decisions with where this game is going, I just try and keep up as best I can. 

I understand that people want to play on PC crews.  I think it would be fun if there was in depth game play there, but there would be HUGE gaps of time where it would be hard to find things for certain possitions to do (think com officer or transporter room specialist).  You would also allow NPCs to take over because you can't expect people to fill a crew every time they play, or there would be long periods of time where whole groups can't even play.   There are just a lot of logistical barriers like that.  Cryptic seems committed to constantly adding things to the game, so they'll probably end up with enough content eventually to warrant PC crews.

The thing I don't understand is all this talk of lack of group play...  The game seems to be group based.  At it's core, every action you do, can be done with a group: exploration, episodic missions, creating your own races/sharing them, etc.  And, there are many parts of the game that are designed solely for group play:  FactionvFaction combat, Fleet star bases with FleetvsFleet battles, grouped defense against "an ancient threat", borg, and whatever other PvE content they decide, etc.  They have even said that Fleets can have their own ship yards and produce their own ships.  With this system there will be resource networks, tech trading etc.  

I do feel bad for the people who won't get the type of group exprience that they want, but I really think that some of your perceptions are skewed because of your feelings on the no PC crew decisions.  This game simply isn't taking the direction that many of you are representing.  Sorry, I tried to say that as nicely as possible. 

As for the comparissons with EVE:  STO will have a rich PvE aspect, Faction vs Faction warfare, no ship permadeath, won't take you forever to get from point A to B, won't have the same slow skill system (STOs is exp based), you will have an Avatar and %50 of the mission based content will be on the surface, etc.  There is a lot more.  About the only similarities are that you will be in space and you will have a resource network that will help in customization and building of your ships.  I would say those are the good aspects of EVE though, why not use them too?

Originally posted by Krasny

From what I have read STO is going to be a massive single player game.

 

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of playing a game online?

How does this differ from every MMO released after 2004?

Originally posted by Krasny

From what I have read STO is going to be a massive single player game.

 

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of playing a game online?

  History has shown that it needs a balance of not only pvp/pve but also solo ability along with some group missions/quests.  Like a strickly pvp game a group intensive game doesnt draw the big numbers. Having said that games such as DDO , while hardly a huge success, does manage to stay alive and it is as group intensive as any game i have played. However i think game devs want their games to do a bit better than DDO in which case it needs to appeal to as many different types of gameplay as possible. Doing this in balance is the challenge all new games face if they want to draw the big numbers. 

Originally posted by tamgros

I understand that people want to play on PC crews.  I think it would be fun if there was in depth game play there, but there would be HUGE gaps of time where it would be hard to find things for certain possitions to do (think com officer or transporter room specialist).  You would also allow NPCs to take over because you can't expect people to fill a crew every time they play, or there would be long periods of time where whole groups can't even play.   There are just a lot of logistical barriers like that.  Cryptic seems committed to constantly adding things to the game, so they'll probably end up with enough content eventually to warrant PC crews.

The thing I don't understand is all this talk of lack of group play...  The game seems to be group based.  At it's core, every action you do, can be done with a group: exploration, episodic missions, creating your own races/sharing them, etc.  And, there are many parts of the game that are designed solely for group play:  FactionvFaction combat, Fleet star bases with FleetvsFleet battles, grouped defense against "an ancient threat", borg, and whatever other PvE content they decide, etc.  They have even said that Fleets can have their own ship yards and produce their own ships.  With this system there will be resource networks, tech trading etc.  

I do feel bad for the people who won't get the type of group exprience that they want, but I really think that some of your perceptions are skewed because of your feelings on the no PC crew decisions.  This game simply isn't taking the direction that many of you are representing.  Sorry, I tried to say that as nicely as possible. 

As for the comparissons with EVE:  STO will have a rich PvE aspect, Faction vs Faction warfare, no ship permadeath, won't take you forever to get from point A to B, won't have the same slow skill system (STOs is exp based), you will have an Avatar and %50 of the mission based content will be on the surface, etc.  There is a lot more.  About the only similarities are that you will be in space and you will have a resource network that will help in customization and building of your ships.  I would say those are the good aspects of EVE though, why not use them too?

Well said. I also fail to see the comparison with EVE since it has no avatar, no interiors, no landing parties and no ground based combat. I also fail to see how this game won't be pro-group  when everything I have been reading has told me that it will be so.You just won't be doing it inside of a ship. I think some people just saw "No player crew" and "no free roaming interiors" and just threw their hands up in the air and screamed "EVE Clone!!!!!!"

Originally posted by Hype

The Difference: 

In a PC Crew situation, players can interact as separate entities on their own starships, or collude to form a single entity within a single starship.  In the latter case, no one expendable, and everyone is necessary, not just the healer or the tank.  Everyone is also more specialized... not everyone is attacking to be useful, for instance.  Besides, in this IP, there aren't healer ships and tanking ships, so you limit your class versatility... however within the ship there are classes that mitigate damage (Tactical, Helm) and there are classes that heal damage (Engineering, Medical).  So you get more versatility in a PC Crew situation when it comes to teaming, unless you force EQ classes onto Star Trek ship classes, which would be absurd, but that's what they have to do without PC Crews.

Since so many others are nitpicking, I may as well, too.

Hype, there are specialized ships in Starfleet beyond the Miranda/Constitution/Sovereign/Galaxy power differences/updgrades.

There seems to be an "all-around" ship that we've seen most often in the Enterprise line. These are the ships at the frontier, capable of handling pretty much any mission assigned to it. They explore, they fight, they transport, they host.

In "All Good Things...", Dr. Crusher is the captain of the Pasteur, a medical ship -  a ship equipped with specialized equipment, facilities and crew for medically-specific missions like fighting a plague or helping survivors of a major disaster. It's basically a flying hospital. In STO, you might be assigned to escort such a ship through hostile territory or to rendezvous with one to transfer a cure/sample/patient. Or if you're the captain of one (or have one in your party), maybe you have a mission to explore a planet or region of space to find the cause the of a plaque.

There are also science vessels. I can't name a specific one, but I know I've heard lines like "Starfleet will be sending a science vessel to do a full investigation of the phenomenon" in the shows and in the novels. Or they've been destroyed and the cause investigated. Wasn't the original Vulcan-crewed Intrepid a science vessel? These ships have light armaments and slow engines but have very powerful, sensitive, and specific sensor arrays and facilities. They're useful when an in-depth scientific investigation is warranted and other, more powerfully armed ships are needed elsewhere. In STO, these could be used to map star clusters or research a phenomenon occurring within friendly space.

And then there are the ships like the Defiant - warships with microscopes. While still capable of exploration, this line of ships is used in known hostile territory and situations. Other ships went through the Bajoran wormhole, but the survival rate on ST:DS9 was very low. If you weren't on the Defiant, you may as well have been a redshirt.

I do have to agree that ship-based buffs would be absurd. Totally doesn't fit the IP.

I'm not sure this is the correct thread, but I wanted to take the opportunity to thanks those who pointed me toward StarQuest Online.  It is EXACTLY the type of game I was looking for in terms of the Star Trek genre and represents how a space game with cooperative play, multi-player crews and full ship interiors can be done and done well.

The only short-coming of that game is a buggy code-base, but that is completely understandable given the shoe-string budget indie developer that produces it...and the magnitude of what the fame actually encompases.

For those of you, like me, who were looking for a style of game that is different then the route STO chose to go...I would highly encourage you to check out StarQuest. It very much offers the flavor of game-play that alot of us were looking for from STO...but clearly aren't going to get.

Originally posted by Krasny

Originally posted by misterorff

Originally posted by Krasny

From what I have read STO is going to be a massive single player game.

 

You have not read enough. 

 

Yes thousands of players will be playing their missions online,  but how do players interact during play?

I thought that was SW:TOR, a single player RPG where others share a sever but do all their adventure solo......I am hoping STO is the opposite.